https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284771 The ITAT partly allowed the revenue's appeal, directing the AO to tax 3% of GP on the tainted purchases under section 80HHC. The disallowance by the AO was deemed incorrect, as PAN verification revealed matching details in several confirmations. The ITAT upheld the CIT (A)'s decision based on prior cases limiting GP estimation to 3% of non-genuine purchases. Furthermore, the ITAT permitted the assessee to challenge double addition on peak cash deficit under rule 27, pending further assessment by the AO. en-us Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2019 12:44:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284771 The ITAT partly allowed the revenue's appeal, directing the AO to tax 3% of GP on the tainted purchases under section 80HHC. The disallowance by the AO was deemed incorrect, as PAN verification revealed matching details in several confirmations. The ITAT upheld the CIT (A)'s decision based on prior cases limiting GP estimation to 3% of non-genuine purchases. Furthermore, the ITAT permitted the assessee to challenge double addition on peak cash deficit under rule 27, pending further assessment by the AO. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284771